MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Dreamstime suspended our account  (Read 19662 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: September 02, 2007, 02:12 »
0
I'm a bit amazed anybody should hate DreamsTime. First of all, it's unjust because it's a very well run business. And then, it's a business not a Mother Theresa social support group. I expect them to sell my photos, and so they do. If I have a different view on a rejection, I solve it by private email to support, and they've always been very responsive.

If I want hugs and wows and aaahs, I go to my Flickr account. But I didn't see any payout from Flickr yet.


« Reply #26 on: September 02, 2007, 02:39 »
0

I'm not listening to the way things are said, I am reading what is written.


Unfortunately, this is exactly what Im talking about. People with a limited intellectual capacity are fascinated by the way things are said, rather than the underlying meaning. What youve just given me is another example. It isnt that relevant how I speak (or if it makes it easier for you to picture, write). What is relevant is what is being said (edited to clarify:written).
Unfortunately, you wont defeat any arguements by giggling like a schoolgirl at the combination of words. All it does is waste time and distract attention from the debate, and because every attack needs a defense, I find myself having to lower myself to the same kind of purile, childish banter to explain myself. So, lets get on with it, and dont bother mocking any spelling mistakes/grammatical errors I may have made above.

As far as why you hate them:
1) All the agencies read what is written on other forums, or at least they should.

Its not simply a case of reading other forums. Dreamstime has, many times, read criticisms in forums like this one (forums that they dont run), and emailed the person in question to threaten them that if they criticize them again, they will be booted off their site. Do you think that this is fair?
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 03:28 by FreedomFriesnBruisedEgos »

« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2007, 04:13 »
0
Unfortunately, this is exactly what Im talking about. People with a limited intellectual capacity are fascinated by the way things are said, rather than the underlying meaning. What youve just given me is another example. It isnt that relevant how I speak (or if it makes it easier for you to picture, write). What is relevant is what is being said (edited to clarify:written).
Unfortunately, you wont defeat any arguements by giggling like a schoolgirl at the combination of words. All it does is waste time and distract attention from the debate, and because every attack needs a defense, I find myself having to lower myself to the same kind of purile, childish banter to explain myself. So, lets get on with it, and dont bother mocking any spelling mistakes/grammatical errors I may have made above.

Its not simply a case of reading other forums. Dreamstime has, many times, read criticisms in forums like this one (forums that they dont run), and emailed the person in question to threaten them that if they criticize them again, they will be booted off their site. Do you think that this is fair?
Well where to start? First, resorting to calling a person stupid hardly makes you look like a rational, intelligent person who is actually trying to debate (but your first posting took care of that). Second, there was no giggling. There was laughter at what was a rambling rant of a very pissed off person.  Third, I don't think it is fair if Dreamstime is actually doing such things. Finally, how people write is typically indicative of their cognitive abilities. Since you hijacked a thread that was originally about keyword spammers, perhaps we could get back to that.

P.S. Don't worry about lowering yourself. I hope telling people to piss off and then calling other people stupid is pretty much the bottom.

« Reply #28 on: September 02, 2007, 06:27 »
0
yingyang0:

I'm glad that you volunteered your portfolio for criticism.  It's good to have a representative from IS be the first.  IS does truly blaze the way.

Let's take a look at your most popular photo with a total of (drum roll please) 11 downloads.

It's a photo of a turtle on a beach.



Being that you are a true "wiki warrior" (that sounds so cool - is that some sort of ninja?), you should know that the following keywords are spam:

green, wake, wave, tortoise, big island, sea

Yes, spam is a delicacy in Hawaii, but at IS it leaves a foul taste on a designer's fine palate.

I am sure that you will agree that this should call for an immediate suspension of your account until you can explain your obvious malicious actions.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 06:39 by StockManiac »

« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2007, 06:51 »
0
^^ A good point from the man above. Most people spam unintentionally (or maybe intentionally). Often its a case of inexperience, or just trying too hard. Its not something to be kicked off a site for. Sure, istock could give you a warning, but to kick you off would be unfair.

Well where to start? First, resorting to calling a person stupid hardly makes you look like a rational, intelligent person who is actually trying to debate (but your first posting took care of that). Second, there was no giggling. There was laughter at what was a rambling rant of a very pissed off person.  Third, I don't think it is fair if Dreamstime is actually doing such things. Finally, how people write is typically indicative of their cognitive abilities. Since you hijacked a thread that was originally about keyword spammers, perhaps we could get back to that.

P.S. Don't worry about lowering yourself. I hope telling people to piss off and then calling other people stupid is pretty much the bottom.

The idea that I "hijacked a thread" is nonsense- I was perfectly on topic. This thread is as much about "keyword spammers" as it is about Dreamstime's treatment of their contributors. I was talking about this- until I was attacked by two people who found the kind of language I was using terribly amuzing. One thing you say may be true: "how people write is typically indicative of their cognitive abilities." But lets be clear about this- its not relevant to the debate, and neither was your original post. Youre concentrating on the person speaking (writing), and the way they speak (write) rather than the meaning. In other words, youre off topic. You do say "I don't think it is fair if Dreamstime is actually doing such things." which implies that you agree with the substance behind the words, so I dont really see what point youre making.

There are a few posts somewhere on this site about Dreamstime spying on forums and making threats. Take a look if you havent already- youll see that its a lousy company.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 07:16 by FreedomFriesnBruisedEgos »

« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2007, 12:52 »
0
yingyang0:

I'm glad that you volunteered your portfolio for criticism.  It's good to have a representative from IS be the first.  IS does truly blaze the way.

Let's take a look at your most popular photo with a total of (drum roll please) 11 downloads.

It's a photo of a turtle on a beach.



Being that you are a true "wiki warrior" (that sounds so cool - is that some sort of ninja?), you should know that the following keywords are spam:

green, wake, wave, tortoise, big island, sea

Yes, spam is a delicacy in Hawaii, but at IS it leaves a foul taste on a designer's fine palate.

I am sure that you will agree that this should call for an immediate suspension of your account until you can explain your obvious malicious actions.

1) I didn't volunteer.
2) It's a green sea turtle that was photographed on the big island of hawaii. Of course you knew that from the description on the photograph. That white stuff on top is the wake from a wave.

If you think that's spam you're insane. Spam is something that isn't in or related to the photo. If I had "business" in there then you would have been making a valid point instead of making a bad attempt at attacking someone.

P.S. That is not my most popular photo, and I take offense at someone trying to single me out when they could easily read the description to find out nothing there was spam . If you want to show examples then provide a link to your own portfolio.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 12:58 by yingyang0 »

« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2007, 13:15 »
0
The idea that I "hijacked a thread" is nonsense- I was perfectly on topic. This thread is as much about "keyword spammers" as it is about Dreamstime's treatment of their contributors. I was talking about this- until I was attacked by two people who found the kind of language I was using terribly amuzing. One thing you say may be true: "how people write is typically indicative of their cognitive abilities." But lets be clear about this- its not relevant to the debate, and neither was your original post. Youre concentrating on the person speaking (writing), and the way they speak (write) rather than the meaning. In other words, youre off topic. You do say "I don't think it is fair if Dreamstime is actually doing such things." which implies that you agree with the substance behind the words, so I dont really see what point youre making.

There are a few posts somewhere on this site about Dreamstime spying on forums and making threats. Take a look if you havent already- youll see that its a lousy company.


Can you provide actual examples of people being mistreated? How were you mistreated?

I found this thread: http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?topic=1581.0

But that just shows that stockmaniac and you are both anonymous posters who some people believe are actually employees or creators of competing agencies.

People who are unwilling to provide links to their own portfolios shouldn't talk (that's directed at stockmaniac).
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 13:44 by yingyang0 »

« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2007, 15:14 »
0
Sorry, dupe post...
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 15:21 by GeoPappas »

« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2007, 15:16 »
0
What does everyone consider "spamming" anyway?

To me, the word "spam" seems to be a little overused.

I think that spamming is adding an obviously blatant keyword, such as the keyword "sex" to a photo of a carrot, or the word "business" to a photo of a landscape.

And it seems that the definition of "spam" has changed over the last year or so.

Stock agencies used to recommend adding "additional" keywords to the image that would describe the emotion or where the image was taken.  Now some of them just want you to add the keywords for what is seen in the image.

What do you think?
« Last Edit: September 02, 2007, 15:20 by GeoPappas »

« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2007, 15:23 »
0
People who are unwilling to provide links to their own portfolios shouldn't talk (that's directed at stockmaniac).

And people who spam keywords shouldn't be "Wiki Warriors".

You're a hypocrite.  You go around telling people that they are spamming and should have their accounts closed, when you yourself do the same thing.

« Reply #35 on: September 02, 2007, 15:32 »
0
allright, due to at least as much insulting and 'bickering' back and forth as there is discusison, this thread is now locked.

What keyword spam is, or what good keyword is, is an interesting discussion mind you...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
30 Replies
11948 Views
Last post October 02, 2011, 07:03
by leaf
17 Replies
3512 Views
Last post September 18, 2012, 15:44
by tavi
83 Replies
10736 Views
Last post December 18, 2016, 04:37
by 50%
6 Replies
3158 Views
Last post February 02, 2017, 09:27
by Chichikov
4 Replies
2055 Views
Last post July 18, 2018, 08:25
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results